The year 2012 isn't 1980. While both periods featured a widely unpopular incumbent Democrat in the White House and a weak economy, in 2012 there is no charismatic Ronald Reagan to capture the imagination and trust of a broad coalition while championing and unifying the Republican cause. As the GOP primary campaign slogs on, Mitt Romney continues to enjoy an overall plurality of support b...

"In 2008, young, idealistic voters turned out in large numbers for Obama. In 2008, many of them are older, wiser and unemployed." - from the article...

Speaks volumes of truth... One problem though - 4 years and no job does not quite make them old enough or wise enough to see through the deceit yet.. We can only hope that they have at least lost the enthusiasm to cast another misguided vote in '12.

GK wrote:It would be best for Republicans if they would just sit this election out.

Nah, Obama may very well get re-elected in '12 which will be OK as long as the Repubs gain control of the Senate and maintain control of the House. If there really is any "Ying and Yang" in this world then that would be the best possible scenario for this country with a second Obama term...

"Through being Cool..."

Most of the time doing something that feels good isn't the same as doing something good.

Well-written, and well-reasoned, article, Mike. Unfortunately, it lacks the gaggingly-pithy emoting and name-calling of Mike Littwin. Hence, when the Lefties awaken this morning, they will come after you and your column with an overkill of similarly gaggingly-pithy posts.

So it goes...I'll be voting for the Republican nominee. Though we, as a country, would undoubtedly be able to survive another four years of Obama, I would rather not go through the pain of waiting to undo his failed and disastrous policies.

Reagan and both Democratic houses of Congress lowered tax rates, leading to a significant increase in tax collections because of the revived economy. What did Obama do? We got Obamacare and a promise of adding $1 TRILLION in debt over the next ten years. When will the left leaning schools who have taught the last two generations get it and teach a more balanced approach to civics and economics?

GK wrote:It would be best for Republicans if they would just sit this election out.

Nah, Obama may very well get re-elected in '12 which will be OK as long as the Repubs gain control of the Senate and maintain control of the House. If there really is any "Ying and Yang" in this world then that would be the best possible scenario for this country with a second Obama term...

Hm, interesting. I seem to recall most on the right counting their chickens before they hatched: even before Obama took office, they were acting as if it was a slam dunk that Obama would be a one-term president, Carter, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Reagan and both Democratic houses of Congress lowered tax rates, leading to a significant increase in tax collections because of the revived economy. What did Obama do? We got Obamacare and a promise of adding $1 TRILLION in debt over the next ten years. When will the left leaning schools who have taught the last two generations get it and teach a more balanced approach to civics and economics?

Let's not forget Iran Contra. Regan supplied arms to Iran, in exchange for them holding the hostages until after the election of 1980, in which Regan beat Carter. There are those who consider this to be treasonous. To meddle in foreign policy and deal with foreign governments BEFORE an election undermines the existing government.See: http://www.consortiumnews.com/2005/russiantext.html

But this is not the first time. Nixon did it too! Nixon was dealing with the North Vietnamese before the election of 1968. In the LBJ tapes released recently, we have LBJ talking to Senator Everett Dirkson in which LBJ acknowledges that Nixon had contacted the North Vietnamese BEFORE the election, and stalled the peace talks until after the election. LBJ even said it could be considered treasonous, but never made that information public.

Mr. Rosen you are no Libertarian and have never publically been supportive of RP! Both Repubs and Dems are left wing Keynesians, and their fiat currency has almost finninshed running its course.

1. Never happen not with the economy improving the way it is LOL

2.Many if not more Republicans like myself will not think twice about the left leaning social conservative establishment pukes and again throw our votes away and vote 3rd party. Too bad that the establishment Repubs are insane(McCain 08) and should maybe join Obama's team as they are ensuring his win in November.

Time to purge the GOP and and hunker down for 4 more years and Supreme Court justice appointments will be crucial. Too bad the establishment Republicans didn't understand this sooner, but the writing is on the wall. Might just be the very end of the GOP as this country cannot afford to keep fighting wars or printing money (Keynesian) The economic collapse is unavoidable and can't be falsely propped up for that long of a time frame. Sad fact is 3 out of 4 GOP candidates would like to continue this, and only 1 understands the economical implosion coming at us like a freight train.

Last edited by Lizthewiz on February 16th, 2012, 7:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

I love how wrong Rosen's facts almost always are. Right out of the gate he says, "a widely unpopular incumbent Democrat". Obama isn't widely unpopular; not even close. Most sitting President's "popularity" swings a few points north and south of 50% and that isn't enough to move an election. Carter's biggest problem was the hostages being held by Iran. Hey Mike: what happened to your investments? Bwahahahahahahhah. Karma, baby.

GK wrote:It would be best for Republicans if they would just sit this election out.

Nah, Obama may very well get re-elected in '12 which will be OK as long as the Repubs gain control of the Senate and maintain control of the House. If there really is any "Ying and Yang" in this world then that would be the best possible scenario for this country with a second Obama term...

Hm, interesting. I seem to recall most on the right counting their chickens before they hatched: even before Obama took office, they were acting as if it was a slam dunk that Obama would be a one-term president, Carter, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Now it seems....maybe moving the goalposts are in order?

Don't get me wrong here Charles... I'm certainly conceeding nothing as the election will be a close one regardless of which GOP candidate gets the nod.No, I am just pushing the point that I'm sure you would agree with - the POTUS is not a king and the importance of Congressional control. Congress controls what gets to the president's desk for a signature. I remember how gleeful the Dems were when they controlled both houses of Congress for the last two years of the Bush admin ('07-'08), which is a point that the left completely ignores when it comes to "blame" for the recession. I guess you could spin it as "moving the goalposts" but I personnaly would call it "hoping for that change" at minimum. As another poster's signature reads "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers" and I, for one, simply do not want to underestimate...

"Through being Cool..."

Most of the time doing something that feels good isn't the same as doing something good.

GK wrote:It would be best for Republicans if they would just sit this election out.

Nah, Obama may very well get re-elected in '12 which will be OK as long as the Repubs gain control of the Senate and maintain control of the House. If there really is any "Ying and Yang" in this world then that would be the best possible scenario for this country with a second Obama term...

Hm, interesting. I seem to recall most on the right counting their chickens before they hatched: even before Obama took office, they were acting as if it was a slam dunk that Obama would be a one-term president, Carter, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Now it seems....maybe moving the goalposts are in order?

Don't get me wrong here Charles... I'm certainly conceeding nothing as the election will be a close one regardless of which GOP candidate gets the nod.No, I am just pushing the point that I'm sure you would agree with - the POTUS is not a king and the importance of Congressional control. Congress controls what gets to the president's desk for a signature. I remember how gleeful the Dems were when they controlled both houses of Congress for the last two years of the Bush admin ('07-'08), which is a point that the left completely ignores when it comes to "blame" for the recession. I guess you could spin it as "moving the goalposts" but I personnaly would call it "hoping for that change" at minimum. As another poster's signature reads "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers" and I, for one, simply do not want to underestimate...

Sadly whom ever gets the republican nod (even a rock with an "R" scribbled on it) will be voted on by the right. not that WE can trust him or that he is remotely qualified for the job... But Just because he is not Obama.

So Mike agrees with the old political bromide that you either vote the party line or your vote is wasted. I, politely, disagree. Voting the party line is what got us in the situation we currently find ourselves in. If enough of us vote Libertarian or Tea Party, we can change the political landscape and stop the yin/yang - Republican/Democrat stranglehold on on the political process. What is the difference between the Republicans and the Democrats? One is in power and one wants to be in power. One panders to the left and one panders to the right and neither takes their promises seriously. Both do the same things in the same way and it's all about keeping or taking seats in Congress or the Presidency. They will (and do) lie, cheat and steal to get the job done and neither side cares one whit for or about the American people. We are just "statistics" to be managed, pushed and convinced to give them power. Once they have it, they are all about getting re-elected and could care less about you or me and our wants and needs. Throw the bums out. Pick a new party and lets let the "professional" politicians know that "we are mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore!"

The year 2012 isn't 1980. While both periods featured a widely unpopular incumbent Democrat in the White House

Right out of the gate! Rosen uses this sleight-of-hand method a lot: throw out something that he acts as though is an established, undisputed fact and go from there, hoping we won't notice what he just did... So a sitting president of whom more Americans think he's doing a good job than don't means he's "widely unpopular"? (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... -1044.html). Good to know.

To paraphrase former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld

If you truly do want to see the GOP take back the White House, I'd avoid Iraq war references like the plague.

As I wrote last week, I think it's becoming clear to the GOP establishment that Obama will get a second term. I don't blame Rosen for what he's doing in this column, but you gotta admit, the basic message of 'C'mon,guys, I know we don't all like the guy we're gonna run against Obama, but he's the best shot we've got, so... you know.' doesn't bode well for the GOP presidential campaign.